Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'macOS' started by MacVault, Dec 14, 2006.
Any hard evidence Leopard will use ZFS as it's default filesystem?
lots of rumours & speculation, but I havent seen or heard anything that can be positively substantiated (yet)
perhaps someone else has more info
Highly unlikely. They'll almost certainly let it bake for a while before trying to make it the default (also afaik it's not bootable yet).
I'm not sure where I stand on HFS vs. UFS
They've got to do something about Finder, for sure.
I still haven't seen any evidence that ZFS has been added to Leopard.
Even though it can host other file systems, if ZFS is not yet bootable, it won't be the primary file system. Isn't HFS+ still encapsulated within an HFS volume, as it was originally, so that systems that don't support HFS+ can observe it?
uumm.....UFS & ZFS are 2 different things, like totally dude !
It can be, but the standard implementation of HFS+ is naked.
I saw this posted on Digg.
Can't get to the "actual" site right now. Anyone checked it out?
"ZFS is in Leopard. *But* you cannot use it as the main partition type from the installer... yet, if at all. So it is not The file system of choice in Leopard. http://exiva.net/per/DSC03347.JPG"
here's a copy of the image incase the server gets dugg.
nvm, too late..
Here is the screenshot...
I should have said HFS vs. UFS vs. ZFS. I'm not sure of the three which one that I would prefer.
Considering Apple's UFS implementation is ancient and pretty bad, I'd exclude UFS from the comparison.
another screenshot, from the net:
Now if only M$ would join in on the 21st century, that would be great!
No doubt that Windows wont read ZFS in the future because open source is a cancer
Windows really needs to take a bite out of Apple and open up their OS..
At least they aren't using NTFS
Microsoft took the whole NT project and laid a Cleveland steamer on it. Read up on it sometime, you'll know what I mean.
Well, here's to hoping, but doesn't that look awfully fake?
Being that Apple's UFS is different than others doesn't help. Besides that, UFS2 arrived in FreeBSD 5.0 but Apple chose to ignore it.
Sun's ZFS vs Zetera's ZFS?
Does anyone know if Sun's ZFS offers Storage over Internet Protocol (SoIP) as does Zetera's ZFS? It seems very "cool" to be able to just plug a bare-bones hard drive (no OS, etc) into an ethernet cable somewhere on the network - rather than into a SATA cable. Is this not what Sun's ZFS is all about? Or is it? Is Sun's ZFS "way better" than Zetera's ZFS? Or are they totally different beasts and thus not to be compared???
No ZFS (in Solaris) doesn't support sharing over IP directly. ZFS is all about managing local storage rather than for sharing to the network.
However when a ZFS volume is created it's possible to have this automatically shared out over NFS.
Sun ZFS vs Zetera ZFS. They're totally different, just happen to have the same acronym.
Neither of those screen shots are convincing me. Why would a DVD image be in ZFS format, that just doesn't make any sense.
It's worth pointing out that ZFS is more than just a FileSystem it includes volume management as well. A quick outline to create ZFS volumes in Solaris goes like this:
1 - Create a storage pool. Just stick in all the disks you want to use in the pool.
2 - Make volumes out of the pool. For example you can say 'give me 5 mirrored volumes' and they will be automatically generated from the pool.
Neither of the screenshots seem to include anything like that kind of functionality.
Also ZFS volumes don't really have a defined size as such. The volume can grow to fill all available space in the storage pool (you can set a limit or a reservation).
Let's move conversation over to the new news thread about it: